“MSM [males who have sex with males] aged 13–24 had the greatest percentage increase (53 percent) in diagnoses of HIV infection from 2006 through 2009. Yet public schools must keep on “affirming” this behavior? This is educational and medical malpractice.” — Linda Harvey

What’s worse than asking ninth-graders intrusive and sexually explicit questions on a school survey, even if they do live in a liberal district?

It’s discovering misbehavior, coming to exactly the wrong conclusion about the causes and recommending more harm be done.

A new report published by the Centers for Disease Control shows that teenagers in public schools who believe themselves to be homosexual or bisexual are taking more risks all across the board. While this should not come as a big surprise to the average American with common sense, it is a stunning revelation to our psychobabbly federal public health professionals. After all, they can’t even bring themselves to say “Stop it!” to men who have anal sex with other men.

The National Youth Risk Behavior Surveys are given to high schoolers, and the Centers for Disease Control looked at the data from 2001 to 2009 in the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin and the cities of Boston, Chicago, Milwaukee, New York City, San Francisco and San Diego, locales where the schools permitted questions about homosexual identity/behavior, which isn’t always the case in less “progressive” areas.

Teens who called themselves “gay, lesbian or bisexual,” or who were unsure, as well as those who didn’t use those labels but had sexual contact only with same-sex people or with both sexes, were found to be more likely than heterosexually identified students to engage in seven out of the 10 risk behavior categories. These were: 1) behaviors that contribute to violence; 2) behaviors related to attempted suicide; 3) tobacco use; 4) alcohol use; 5) other drug use; 6) sexual behaviors; and 7) weight management.

Now, I’m not in favor of asking kids these detailed sexual questions, and I’m not alone – many parents feel the same way. In fact, there are quite a few controversies in schools because of inappropriate surveys.

But now that we have this information, it gives an important snapshot, if we evaluate it appropriately.

However, the CDC researchers jumped to predictable conclusions. Among the solutions was the need for “supportive” school environments – meaning, approval of homosexuality – including more “gay straight alliance” clubs and pro-homosexual teacher diversity training. Also, health-care settings and workers need training to be more “open and nonjudgmental.”

Yet haven’t these researchers already been quite judgmental themselves? There’s no way, apparently, they considered the possibility that homosexuality might be a very wrong and unwelcome identity and behavior, nor that maybe these are desperately troubled kids, reflected in their histories of undesirable conduct.

I mean, which comes first, the “gay” feelings or the drug use? The smoking? Is there a cause/effect relationship? Or do they both stem from something else entirely?

The researchers believe these kids just suffer from low self-esteem – which may be true – but they assume it’s the fault of others, including the general social stigmatization of homosexuality. Then, of course, with no supporting evidence, they apparently adopt the “gay” lobby’s position that views against homosexuality are unwarranted and inevitably provoke bullying and self-harm. Homosexuality is either innate, or benign, or both, according to the unsupported, accepted narrative.

So the researchers submit the only possible answer: affirming homosexual behavior. Bullying and difficulties at school will be solved by molding others to a new homosexual “ethic” through favorable policies, re-education sessions and student “gay” clubs.

Yet let’s look at some details of the CDC findings that don’t jibe with these conclusions. For instance, are we actually supposed to believe that low self-respect or social rejection because of one’s homosexual identity causes teens to refuse to wear seat belts? That was one of the risk behaviors higher among “sexual minority” youth. How about driving after having consumed alcohol? What about being abused by a date or being forced to have sex? Wouldn’t that be “gay-on-gay” violence? This would put at least some “gay” kids in the category of “bullier/abuser.” Whoops! There goes another talking point.

Seriously, the percentages reporting dating violence are distinctly higher among the “sexual minority” youth. Why aren’t we seeing a proliferation of anti-violence programs aimed specifically at these kids?

Or how about having already, at their tender ages, had sex with at least four people? Is promiscuity a common reaction to real or perceived discrimination? Or failing to use a condom if they are having sex?

They were also more likely to have smoked, drunk alcohol, tried marijuana, or had sexual intercourse, all before age 13. Is anyone seeing a pattern emerge here? On this point, wouldn’t this have transpired before most declared themselves to be, as they believe, “gay, lesbian or bisexual”?

The problem here, of course, is the solutions themselves are biased and discriminatory. Nor would they be applied in comparable situations. For instance, there’s considerable evidence that overweight students experience bullying and social rejection more than others. And, these kids more often attempt suicide and engage in other risky conduct. So, where are the obesity-affirmation school programs? Why not recommend those?

As usual, political correctness has swallowed common sense. This data reveal troubled kids with issues that often pre-date puberty, heading down a road of self-harm. Others along the way may contribute, but the core dysfunction doesn’t go away by joining a “gay straight alliance.”

This misbehavior can’t all be blamed on others. It’s a picture of sad case histories where parents or guardians were most likely neglectful, abusive or both. Many of these kids raised themselves, aided primarily by our trashy culture. This looks a lot more like a combination of home troubles and rebellion than systemic social discrimination. And sexual deviance is most likely the result of the same factors responsible for the other risky practices.

Ironically, all this is being reported along with another alarming and related indicator. From another section of the CDC comes the latest HIV surveillance report with these findings about young males:

MSM [males who have sex with males] aged 13–24 had the greatest percentage increase (53 percent) in diagnoses of HIV infection from 2006 through 2009.

Yet public schools must keep on “affirming” this behavior? This is educational and medical malpractice. Truly caring adults would be looking at the big picture, not exploiting already troubled kids for a harmful political agenda. No matter what causes these kids to engage in dangerous behaviors, encouraging them to embrace one more – homosexuality – is only going to bring more heartbreak and harm into their already complicated lives.